Re: Re: Packaging Dilemma

On Wednesday 19 May 2004 08:10, Jeff Pitman wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 May 2004 00:41, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 12:26:33AM +0800, Jeff Pitman wrote:
> > > On Monday 17 May 2004 23:31, Jeff Pitman wrote:
> > > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Would I be shot on-sight if I prefixed everything in /opt/pyvault
> > > and put a path to /opt/pyvault/bin in /etc/profile.d/pyvault.sh?
> > > ;-)
> >
> > Yes! :)
> >
> > Why do you want to hide these away?
>
> Because of my problem with pygtk2/gnome-python placing files
> in /usr/share/pygtk/2.0/.  This would prevent a Python 2.2.2 version
> of pygtk2 be shared with the same system as Python 2.3.3.  I will
> look into modifying this particular location.  But, the first thing
> came to mind was "what if I just dumped everything in /opt/pyvault/"?
>
> I may end up patching /usr/bin/pygtk-codegen-2.0 to make things work.

Plus, I can skip all the suffix crap that I have to append to all the 
binaries installed into /usr/bin/.  Like, /usr/bin/python2.3 
or /usr/bin/idle2.3 or even crazy things 
like /usr/bin/xmlproc_parse2.3.  

It'd be nice to pull a kde-redhat repo method and just bring everything 
peripheral to Python up-to-date on whatever distro, but there's just so 
many distro-centric things dependent on Python (config, etc.).  

Options:

1. Patch naming of files and directories to coexist with installed 
Python.
2. Freak everyone out by dumping in /opt. See 
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#OPTADDONAPPLICATIONSOFTWAREPACKAGES
3. Upgrade everything to use the latest version of Python and 
Obsoletes/Provides the other versions into oblivion.

Recommendations?

(I know I've discussed this before, but I just don't have solid 
arguments to found the direction of packaging.)

-- 
-jeff